Editorial: Ethics chair, ethics problem

Updated 7:31 am, Thursday, July 19, 2012

THE ISSUE:

The head of the state's ethics and lobbying watchdog panel is a member of a group that lobbies the state.

THE STAKES:

She harms her own image — but worse, the state's.

In the course of just one week, we're getting two lessons in the right way for public officials to deal with a conflict of interest and the wrong way. And both of them come courtesy of members of New York state's own ethics watchdog group.

What's a little surprising is that the wrong way to do it is being shown by Janet DiFiore, the chairwoman of the Joint Commission on Public Ethics. If there's a pecking order for integrity on the board, one would think Ms. DiFiore would take pains to be at the top of it.

More Information

Both Ms. DiFiore and Ravi Batra, a JCOPE member, have belonged to outside organizations that lobby the state — an awkward situation, considering that JCOPE's duties include investigating and monitoring lobbying of state government.

While the groups may not fit the technical definition of lobbyists or clients, they both push for and against legislation, which any layman would call lobbying. Mr. Batra promptly resigned from the New York State Trial Lawyers Association after a reporter pointed out to him the group's legislative work.

No, Mr. Batra was not a lobbyist, and his ignorance about the group's lobbying role suggests he was not particularly involved or interested in the Trial Lawyers Association's legislative work in Albany. But clearly he saw that even the appearance of a conflict of interest looks bad on a JCOPE member.

Not so, it seems, for Ms. DiFiore, Gov. Andrew Cuomo's pick for the top seat on the board. Ms. DiFiore, who is the Westchester County district attorney, is president of the state District Attorneys Association. The group's own constitution states that its roles include supporting or opposing legislation — again, the very definition of lobbying. The very thing, that is, that the board Ms. DiFiore leads is supposed to regulate.

Perhaps it's the difference in the kind of work they do that makes it possible for Mr. Batra and Ms. DiFiore to look at virtually the same scenario and come up with two different views on its propriety. Mr. Batra, with a trial lawyer's perspective, may be more capable of finding clarity in shades of gray and appreciating the significance of appearances. A DA like Ms. DiFiore, for whom prosecution boils down so often to black and white facts, may have trouble with nuance.

Ms. DiFiore's term as head of the DA's association ends Saturday, but she'll still be a member of the group. There's no sign she plans to emulate Mr. Batra. As her own spokesman put it, "The district attorney is not a lobbyist." And, "The District Attorneys Association is a professional organization, not a lobbying group."

Which arguably boils down to, "You got nothin' on me."

Hardly the kind of attitude toward integrity we'd expect from an ethics watchdog.

Make a choice, Ms. DiFiore. If not for your own image, then for the image of the board.